Calorie Counter

Message Boards Debate: Health and Fitness
You are currently viewing the message boards in:

Why do people keep defending sugar?

1356716

Replies

  • foolforcarbosfoolforcarbos Member Posts: 70 Member Member Posts: 70 Member
    Queue the Disagrees, but instead of a direct answer, I'll try to add to the discussion by another means.

    And I will talk directly to the OP here. :)

    A better question may have been:

    Do you believe sugar is necessary in a diet?

    https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0,44&q=is+sugar+necessary+in+a+diet&btnG=

    What is the role of sweeteners vs free sugars in our diet?

    https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0022034515590377

    Or at the least, ask which sugars would you defend being in a diet?

    Sucrose, glucose, galactose, lactose, maltose, or xylose?

    But I guess, one could start the conversation with:

    Do you believe that the sugar industry paid off scientists, and Congress, to conceal the potential dangers of too much sugar in one's diet, especially for young children during their developmental years? Or maybe because of that, if indeed so, that there are still thousands who are committed to believing old or tainted data?

    One source of many:

    https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/09/13/493739074/50-years-ago-sugar-industry-quietly-paid-scientists-to-point-blame-at-fat

    From there, one could ask:

    Do you believe that there exist parts of a diet that are addictive, and thus create obesity, and not via - a lack of willpower? Do you believe the food industry is tainting our processed foods, by stripping out nutrients, to substitute with their additives - to make people addicted?

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5946262/

    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0306452203005025

    https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/british-journal-of-nutrition/article/prevention-and-reversal-of-dietinduced-leptin-resistance-with-a-sugarfree-diet-despite-high-fat-content/B5151988E8E23EB1F7CC75565B2BE069#

    Or after reading some of the responses, thus far, one could ask:

    Do you believe one can add sugars to their diets, to add calories, to then add (or maintain) weight?

    You could also wonder:

    If someone lowers their daily sugar intake, in grams, and claims their teeth were whiter in weeks, does this seem plausible? (by lowering significantly).

    Or ask what are the choices available that can replace sugar:

    What are the choices to natural sugars, from fruits and vegetables, versus raw cane sugar, or processed sugar?

    Sweeteners? Monk Fruit? Truvia? Stevia? Sweet and Low?

    Is there a reason to avoid natural sugars? What about all those processed sugars?

    https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/56-different-names-for-sugar#section9

    Is eating something sweet a sin? Is replacing the sugar with sweeteners any better?

    Does cutting sugars in the diet help one lose weight? But if that's not a goal, can average people include sugars in a healthy diet? Then we are back to which sugars? sucrose, glucose, galactose, lactose, maltose, or that pesky little xylose? Or is there a natural combination which each person has to find.

    On the flip side of this question (you asked), if one were to look at another item found in the diet, salts, would you expect the results to fall in-line with their answers? So your question would have been why do people defend sugars, and do they defend iodized salts? If you found one advocates sweeteners, do they advocate sea salts (non-iodized)?

    The reason I ask, is it may give a better insight to their mental beliefs. It would be no different than how, say, one may judge someone speaking about the Keto diet, and ascertaining their views, i.e... whether they state one must not only go organic, but pasture feed organic. Or cage-free free range. And then deeper into the whole stress free raising environment. (You know, where they may advocate playing music to the crops, the cattle, the hens, etc...). I feel you get a better since of how, oh, let's say 'committed' they are. :)

    I'll skip my personal conclusions or opinions. But that probably won't stop many from hitting that Disagree button. And yet, life goes on ;)
  • paperpuddingpaperpudding Member Posts: 6,109 Member Member Posts: 6,109 Member
    penny30030 wrote: »
    well sugar could be demonized, my daughters doctor told her sugar is like sandpaper in your veins. And, fruit sugar is not equal to processed granulated sugar, which is the culprit. Processing food is the problem.


    Neither sugar nor processing food is the problem.

    I would say seeing things in polarised extremes is the problem.

    Interestingly a packet of table sugar lasts my household for a good 6 months, although we do eat plenty of already high sugar included foods - like cake or chocolate.

    But I do not have a problem - my weight is stable ( yay! Calorie counting!) and I have no medical issues.
  • NovusDiesNovusDies Member, Premium Posts: 8,504 Member Member, Premium Posts: 8,504 Member
    NovusDies wrote: »
    I admit to not reading the entire thread.

    What proof does anyone have that you need every calorie you consume to be nutrient rich? More nutrients than you need equals more nutrients in your pee. So if you are medically required to control it why not enjoy a sugary snack if you have the calories available?

    Obviously I meant unless you are medically required to control it.
Sign In or Register to comment.